Monthly Archive for April, 2005Page 3 of 6

I heart Google

Here’s why I have a huge boycrush on Google -

A crucial watershed for human / machine interface is going to be the development of contextual meaning. Right now, if you say the word “fish”, machines are very good at giving you 12 definitions for the word, 6 million examples of where it was used, the etymology, the brute translation into 35 other languages, etc.

What machines are very bad at doing is understanding the difference between “I was fishing for a compliment” and “I was fishing for trout.” This is contextual meaning, and one promising route for developing this kind of interaction has to do with vast language data mining, collocating contextual markers (when ‘fish’ shows up in verb form near ‘compliment’, it has significance for the meaning) and response analysis (what response did this contextual meaning elicit, and how does that impact our understanding). Google’s underlying technology looks to be very promising at doing this.

This is the brass ring of seamless human / machine agent interaction - getting an interface that has robust contextual recognition, that can learn your own contextual patterns, that can interact with other machine agents to develop meta-data to project potential meanings. Imagine a machine agent that can work through this internal process:

“My owner recently completed a master’s degree in theology at this school, with these other people in his class. He seems to be using the word ‘emerging’ more frequently in his writing and conversations. There’s a good chance that these other people who share his educational context and his social context are using this term in the same way. I should go mine the linguistic data from this very narrow, very specific group of people to see if I can develop a contextual meaning for ‘emerging’ when he uses it in certain ways.”

I walk into the room and say, “Beezle (my computer’s name), is it too late to get a flight to that emerging church conference in San Diego?”

Even if I’ve never used the word “emerging” with Beezle before, he has a very rich, very accurate sense of the meaning, and can draw an inference to the exact conference that I’m referring to based on that meaning.

Google’s in a great position to be able to bring this together. Are they headed that way? Take a look at the type of jobs they’re hiring for at the bottom of the google labs page. The one that caught my eye was “natural language processing.”

We’ll see. I’m excited. What an awesome time to be alive.

Increase Your Size! 10-25% Growth! All Natural!!!!

Wanna see a 10-25% increase in size? No gimmicks! This stuff really works! Simply click on this link, and you’ll experience the kind of increase you’ve been looking for!

Ok really, you have to click on the link. It won’t get your fired from your job as a youth pastor if someone walks in, I promise. There’s nothing inherently wrong about the 10 things listed in the article, but the tone and focus just seems to be completely off. Should we be “strategizing” increased offerings? If we follow the steps suggested by the author, what kind of motivations are we betraying? Are we really approaching that bottom line giving number as an indication of spiritual health among the congregation, or do we view it as the limiting factor on how much ministry God can do in our church? Maybe we need a pastoral gut check before we ask for a larger offering check. (Bam! See how I did that? Two more points, some fancy graphics, a modern translation, and I’m a preacher man! )

Sine qua non, pt. 1

Sine Qua Non

“Without which, not”

It’s a convenient handle to talk about that thing that makes something what it is, and if it is lacking, the thing is not that thing. The sine qua non of being a husband is having a wife (ok, for the sake of the example, can you just give me this one? I know that the gay marriage questions is tweaking this, but lemme just roll with what I got). Our correct intuition is that calling someone a husband entails much more than that simple, thin definition, but we should at least say that if someone does not have a wife, he is not a husband. It is the sine qua non of being a husband.

Here’s why this matters; a major thrust of Evangelicalism has been the push toward a sine qua non of the word Christian. What is the essential component that, if it is lacking, makes an essential difference in whether or not someone is a Christian? Essentially, what is the “thin” definition of Christian. A major thrust of the emerging church movement seems to be headed in the other direction, not in reducing to a thin definition, but expanding to a thick definition of what it means to be a Christ follower.

Sine qua non can wreak havoc on our understanding of evangelism and discipleship. If we’re too focused in on the thin definition of Christian, we can get stuck trying to litmus test everyone to tell if they’re in or out. If they’re in, our job with them is done (who needs discipleship? They’re already in!). If they’re out, they become reduced to a potential conversion, and our interaction with them becomes a one-directional blast we ironically call “witnessing”. This kind of interaction quickly becomes vacuous; it neither fosters relationship, nor is it very effective at its goal. I don’t think anyone would say that this is a healthy understanding of evangelism or discipleship.

(coming next: the value of thick meanings)

Purpose Productions Presents …

Posts in the Emerging Church Comics series

  1. Brian McLaren and Nordic Jesus
  2. Purpose Productions Presents …
  3. Bono and Nordic Jesus
  4. The Emergent 23rd
  5. www.EmergentOrNot.com
  6. The PoMo Architecture Review
  7. The Emergent Tom Cruise
  8. Emerging “C” Movement?
  9. Jesus O’Christ

Click on the thumbnail for the full size version

Previous in series: Brian McLaren and Nordic Jesus

Next in series: Bono and Nordic Jesus

On Preparation

Kyrie Yeshua
Our thoughts bend toward the Sabbath
Our attention to that gathering for common worship

Guide our preparation
That we might be ordained to the tasks of leadership
Not by office or oath
But by the gracious inspiration of your Holy Spirit